Half of LLM users (49%) think the models they use are smarter than they are, including 26% who think their LLMs are “a lot smarter.” Another 18% think LLMs are as smart as they are. Here are some of the other attributes they see:

  • Confident: 57% say the main LLM they use seems to act in a confident way.
  • Reasoning: 39% say the main LLM they use shows the capacity to think and reason at least some of the time.
  • Sense of humor: 32% say their main LLM seems to have a sense of humor.
  • Morals: 25% say their main model acts like it makes moral judgments about right and wrong at least sometimes. Sarcasm: 17% say their prime LLM seems to respond sarcastically.
  • Sad: 11% say the main model they use seems to express sadness, while 24% say that model also expresses hope.
  • @Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    120 hours ago

    Even if an ai has access to more facts and information you should feel confident in your human ability to reason through the data you do know, search new information and process it in the context.

    If you think an ai does all this better than you then you need to try harder.

    • @skozzii@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      It’s sad, but the old saying from George Carlin something along the lines of, “just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize that 50% are even worse…”

      • @Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        120 hours ago

        Yeah but thats 50% on a bell curve. So think of the average person and that represents 68% of the population. Going 1 standard deviation lower 13% then lower is 2%. Numbers here are generalised*

      • @LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        That was back when “average” was the wrong word because it still meant the statistical “mean” - the value all data points would have if they were identical (which is what a calculator gives you if you press the AVG button). What Carlin meant was the “median” - the value half of all data points are greater than and half are less than. Over the years the word “average” has devolved to either the mean or median, as if there’s no difference.

          • @LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 days ago

            There might be no difference. In memes or casual conversation the difference usually doesn’t matter, but when thinking about important things like government policy or medical science, the difference between mean and median is very important - which is why they both exist.

            • @Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              23 days ago
              1. A joke is definitely casual conversation

              2. Mathematically, the difference becomes increasingly statistically insignificant as your population size increases. Sure maybe there’s a few niche cases where a hundred-thousandth of a percent difference matters, but that’s not even worth bringing up.

              3. The only reason any of you even bring it up is to try and sound smart in a pedantic, “ackshually” way.

                • @Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  13 days ago

                  This whole comment chain was me shutting down an “ackshually” with an even better one.

                  If you’re gonna be an annoying pedantic dick, you better be RIGHT, or someone else will be an even more annoying pedantic dick to you.

          • @andros_rex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Not in all cases. When I teach mean, median and mode, I usually bring up household income. Mean income is heavily skewed by outliers (billionaires), median is a more representative measure.

            I guess that’s your “regularly distributed” bit, but a lot of things aren’t regularly distributed.

    • @LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      They are right when it comes to understanding LLMs the LLM definitely understands LLMs better than they do. I’m sure an AI could have a perfect IQ test. But has a really hard time drawing a completely full glass of wine. Or telling me how many R’s are in the word strawberry. Both things a child could do.

  • @DeusUmbra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    304 days ago

    Remember that 54% of adults in American cannot read beyond a 6th grade level, with 21% being fully illiterate.

  • @Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1865 days ago

    Think of a person with the most average intelligence and realize that 50% of people are dumber than that.

    These people vote. These people think billionaires are their friends and will save them. Gods help us.

    • @9point6@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      325 days ago

      I was about to remark how this data backs up the events we’ve been watching unfold in America recently

    • @Gigasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      145 days ago

      I’m of the opinion that most people aren’t dumb, but rather most don’t put in the requisite intellectual effort to actually reach accurate or precise or nuanced positions and opinions. Like they have the capacity to do so! They’re humans after all, and us humans can be pretty smart. But a brain accustomed to simply taking the path of least resistance is gonna continue to do so until it is forced(hopefully through their own action) to actually do something harder.

      Put succinctly: They can think, yet they don’t.

      • JustEnoughDucks
        link
        fedilink
        English
        74 days ago

        Then the question is: what is being smart or dumb? If acting dumb in 90% of life while having the capability of being smart isn’t “being dumb” then what is?

        If someone who has the capability of being 50/100 intelligent and is always acting 50/100, I would argue they are smarter than someone capable of 80/100 intelligence but acts 20/100 intelligence for 90% of their life.

        • @gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Broadly speaking, I’d classify “being dumb” as being incurious, uncritical, and unskeptical as a general rule. Put another way: intellectual laziness - more specifically, insisting on intellectual laziness, and particularly, being proud of it.

          A person with a lower than normal IQ can be curious, and a person with a higher than normal IQ can be incurious. It’s not so much about raw intelligence as it is about the mindset one holds around knowledge itself, and the eagerness (or lack thereof) with which a person seeks to find the fundamental truth on topics that they’re presented with.

        • @Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Basically, although base intelligence/smartness perhaps has two parameters that make it? Effort and speed. Everyone can put in a bit more effort, but base speed may be baked in, unless one trains it, and max reachable base speed will depend from person to person. Hell if I know, we haven’t really created a definitive definition for intelligence yet.

          Edit Addendum: As for what can be considered dumb or smart? I agree, lack of effort can be considered “dumb”. Though the word dumb is a bit broad. I guess we can say many people are, out of habit, “intellectually heedless”

      • @Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 days ago

        For generations many relied on the nightly news to keep them informed. It was always a bad idea. Though the local media wasn’t as bad as it is today. Today for many of these people, propaganda outlets like Sinclair own their local media. And demand fawning of trump/demonizing Democrats. Even if they avoid all media. Their beliefs are formed from those around them that don’t.

    • @Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 days ago

      This is why i don’t believe in democracy. Humans are too easy to manipulate into voting against their interests.
      Even the “intelligent” ones.

  • Owl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1415 days ago

    looking at americas voting results, theyre probably right

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍
    link
    fedilink
    English
    775 days ago

    Reminds me of that George Carlin joke: Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

    So half of people are dumb enough to think autocomplete with a PR team is smarter than they are… or they’re dumb enough to be correct.

  • @fubarx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    505 days ago

    “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin

  • JackFrostNCola
    link
    fedilink
    English
    325 days ago

    "Half of LLM users " beleive this. Which is not to say that people who understand how flawed LLMs are, or what their actual function is, do not use LLMs and therefore arent i cluded in this statistic?
    This is kinda like saying ‘60% of people who pay for their daily horoscope beleive it is an accurate prediction’.

  • @futatorius@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    324 days ago

    Half of all voters voted for Trump. So an LLM might be smarter than them. Even a bag of pea gravel might be.

    • @UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 days ago

      Do you think the two party system properly represents the American people?

      ChatGPT said:

      The two-party system in the U.S. has both strengths and weaknesses when it comes to representing the American people. On one hand, it provides stability and clarity, with the two major parties—Democrats and Republicans—offering distinct platforms that can help simplify voter choice. The system also ensures that one of the two parties has a majority, making governance and passing legislation easier.

      However, the two-party system can limit political diversity, as it often forces voters to choose between two parties that may not fully reflect their views. This can leave many people feeling underrepresented, particularly those with more nuanced or third-party preferences. It also tends to lead to a polarized political environment, where compromise and cooperation between different ideologies can be difficult.

      In short, while the two-party system has worked for providing structure and stability in U.S. politics, it does have drawbacks in terms of broader representation, especially for those who don’t align neatly with either major party.

      • @UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        The system also ensures that one of the two parties has a majority, making governance and passing legislation easier.

        It also tends to lead to a polarized political environment, where compromise and cooperation between different ideologies can be difficult.

        LoL! Okay, they aren’t ready yet. At least these things are fun to play with.

  • kingthrillgore
    link
    fedilink
    English
    244 days ago

    The average literacy level is around that of a sixth grader.

    This tracks

  • @Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    234 days ago

    Next you’ll tell me half the population has below average intelligence.

    Not really endorsing LLMs, but some people…